How to have an open conversation about reading instruction
Guide
Last month, I asked Michiko Hikida and Leah Durán the following question:
Are the reading wars necessary to collectively improve literacy instruction?
I referenced the mental model of thesis, antithesis, and synthesis to frame how push back on adopted ideas may actually lead to better outcomes through iteration.
Their response: 1) the space in which these conversations occur and 2) how open minded the participants were distinguishes earnest discussions from echo chambers.
A chance encounter
By luck, I had an interesting conversation with educators in which to test this model. I was attending a professional learning institute, sitting with educators from another state. We were listening to a presentation about determining essential standards when preparing instruction. Their small group was chatting excitedly about phonemic awareness as one of their chosen standards of focus.
Playing the role of unaware educator, I asked during a reflection break how they came to the decision to deem phonemic awareness an essential standard.
"If they don't have this skill, then their entire reading lives will be impacted."
"My son is dyslexic. If I had known then what I know now, things might be different for him."
"Once everyone agrees that we need to make phonemic awareness a priority, we will see real change in all students’ reading achievement."
I listened, working hard not to nod out of courtesy.
As they went back to their closed conversation, I pulled up the Common Core State Standards. Turning my computer screen toward them, I presented the ten anchor standards for reading. "The Common Core State Standards are far from perfect,” I conceded. “I do find it interesting that what the anchor standards have in common is they ask students to transfer skills like phonemic awareness to more authentic reading experiences."
Lips pursed and brows furrowed. "And that's the problem with the Common Core," the de facto leader of the group shared. “The developers didn't understand what students really need to learn to read.”
I sometimes don't know when to stop, so I scrolled down to the foundational reading skills section of the standards webpage. "You know, I see what mean about the Common Core writers not fully understanding what it means to teach readers. Just look at how they separated phonemic and phonics into two separate standards."
"Actually," another teacher replied, "that would be correct - they should be isolated." I responded that students can benefit when we teach phonemic awareness and phonics together1, as well as in an authentic context2.
Sensing that I knew a little bit more about reading instruction than initially assumed, they took their discussion back to their small group.
How to talk about reading instruction without rocking the boat too much
I wanted to find out through this little experiment if I could facilitate an open conversation about reading instruction with others who were not so open-minded.
However, my intention evolved to wanting to disrupt their thinking a bit, to create a sense of doubt about what they currently believed to be true about teaching readers. I wanted to validate my position by invalidating theirs, even if I was 100% in the right.
What I learned confirms what Hikida and Durán stated:
The space in which these conversations are structured, along with the attitudes we bring to these discussions, matters.
I can walk away from conversations like this one and not worry about the negative repercussions. But in the context of schools, where we have to work together on a daily basis and over many years, how do literacy leaders hold conversations about reading instruction that leads to a better understanding for all?
Next are four elements I have found to be essential for facilitating a productive conversation with faculty members.
#1 - A Clear Purpose
State the reason for coming together.
“We are going to have a conversation about this reading topic so that we can build a better understanding as a faculty of what it means to teach reading and readers.”
The example goal here is to learn, not to persuade.
#2 - A Safe Space
Collaborative norms and discussion protocols provide a structure for these conversations. They also serve as tools for educators to safely engage in dialogue and discussion. Adaptive Schools and National School Reform Faculty offer useful resources for structuring and guiding professional conversations.
#3 - A Third Point
A reason professional conversations devolve into a debate is because new ideas from an objective source have not been introduced. We stick to what we know and currently believe to be true. That means there’s little space for learning.
Providing a professional journal article to read that offers a new perspective on an issue can insert a healthy wedge into a challenging topic. We are no longer trying to win an argument; we are referencing reliable information from the text to support our thinking.
#4 - Reflection That Leads to Action
It’s reasonable to expect teachers to take what was learned from professional learning and apply it to their practice. We can do this through brief reflection, followed by a call to action. Ruth Ayres, editor at Choice Literacy, shared two questions she appreciated after a professional learning event she experienced:
Do you believe this is true?
How will you lead today?
In Summary
Having conversations about politically charged issues like the science of reading requires clear intentions, a safe space, new ideas, and an expectation for collective action. As a leader, we serve best as a facilitator for the conversation rather than trying to guide it toward a specific outcome. Our authority increases when we model how to be comfortable with not knowing, while also demonstrating courage by speaking up when norms might not be followed (especially when we are the ones deviating from the norms). Leaders can mediate the culture and climate so that teachers can take control of the conversation together.
We will be hosting a professional conversation on Tuesday, May 11 at 5:30pm CST with Hannah Schneewind, co-author of Trusting Readers: Powerful Practices for Independent Reading (Heinemann, 2021). We will be discussing the introduction and Chapter 1 which are free to download here. Paid subscribers can participate in this conversation via Zoom (an email will go out to full community members on Monday with details). The discussion will be recorded and posted later this month for all.
Cunningham, Patricia M. "Best Practices in Teaching Phonological Awareness and Phonics." Best Practices in Literacy Instruction, 4th Ed. (Guilford Press, 2011): 199-223.
Johnston, P., & Scanlon, D. (2021). An Examination of Dyslexia Research and Instruction with Policy Implications. Literacy Research: Theory, Method, and Practice, 70(1), 107-128.
Hi Matt,
This was an excellent article!! I loved the format you used- asking the question, sharing your personal and relatable experience of trying to actually start such a conversation and then reminding all of us of the important considerations to keep in the forefront when planning for collaborative, meaningful, important conversations around critical topics in our education communities!!
Thank you very much!!
Discussions about instruction in my experience are much less contentious when anchored in concrete observations of students and their work and in teachers’ actual experiences Portfolio practices bring the advantage of ready access to the real world of student learning and build the habit of grounding discussion of teaching in reality rather than in the head. Discussions anchored in abstractions like content standards or commercial instructional materials can be confusing, and people fall back on ideas that loop and circle. It’s unlikely that anyone would say something like “If we agree to teach phonemic awareness we’re going to solve the problem of struggling readers” if the question is something like “has anyone here had experience teaching phonemic awareness to students? How did it go?” or “what experiences have you had teaching students who really struggle with spelling?” Nobody is right or wrong in such discussions. “What experiences have you had working with students on phonemic awareness” is a different starting place than “what have you read about the importance of phonemic awareness.” From this discussion, teachers working at the same school could agree to observe students in their classrooms and come back to a future discussion with something to talk about. Teachers are interested in hearing and sharing their experiences, and giving them quality time to talk sends the message that the collaborative reflection on teaching experience is perhaps the most beneficial professional development of all.